That one has nothing to do with Crawford far as I’m aware. It’s just plain stupid interaction of several rules. You are definetly intended to be able to just cast disintegrate on the wall.

Some rules are intended in a certain way and just handled poorly. The above case is (I personally think) one of them. Others are actually intended to work a certain way because of designing aspects (like verbal components having to be said at a normal volume) but people simply decide to ditch them anyway, because they like something else better. Both are valid, but they are different.

Oh dear I didn’t even know that. Well that makes it even more absurd.

I’d argue that RAW the wall is still invisible. You now just have the means to pinpoint it’s location.

Funnily enough, Shatter actually has a very easy solution: Objects just take the damage and that’s it.

I actually think it’s a fair restriction for spells that require sight. It imposes a somewhat interesting limit on casters, especially since a lot of spells still do something on a miss.

Yeah I thought of that one as well. It’s one of those weird cases of imprecise wording.

As I have said in another comment, that is RAW not what would happen:

“You can’t even cast it on something behind the wall, because you cannot target something (or someone) with a spell if they are behind total cover. Total cover is created by being behind completely behind an obstacle (like a wall). This counts even if the obstacle is invisible.”

Furthermore, because if you chose an invalid target for a spell, you’d still expend the spellslot but there would be no effect. So you actually spend a sixth level spell a lot to achieve nothing."

It’s very much not RAI I’d say and I would likely handle exactly like you described, but the RAW was so wonky that I wanted to make the meme when I found out about it.

Yes. See invisibility should work as well. Both are quite annoying to activate when in a fight though.

Edit: TIL that detect magic may not work, because the object has to be visible.

It’s technically still invisible. But as there is no clear rule for that I’d say it’s up to interpretation.

No. If we assume that you have to target the wall it would at the very least stop after destroying the wall.

But by RAW, you can’t even cast it on something behind the wall, because you cannot target something (or someone) with a spell if they are behind total cover. Total cover is created by being completely behind an obstacle (like a wall). This counts even if the obstacle is invisible.

Furthermore, if you chose an invalid target for a spell, you still expend the spellslot but there will be no effect. So you’d actually spend a sixth level spell a lot to achieve nothing.

I would not recommend doing it this way, but that’s what the rules say.

Oh definetly. I assume that RAI this is the intention.

The the theoretical problem just solved itself. Neat. Thanks.

I think I don’t get what book this is supposed to be.

At first I thought the inhale was a “Oh shit we’re cooked.” Then I realized it was “Oh shit this is gonna be annoying.”. Pure gold.

If the idea involves simply walking into Avernus, I’ll be as impressed as I’ll be amused.

Beyond that, did the party specifically leave some members behind when I did not notice, or are they simply offscreen during this comic?

I know that it would be out of character, but now I’m trying to make up a plan how this might work. If Mystery can counterspell, then if you send him along while disguised as someone else, it might be possible.

However, as you’ve said, it would not really accomplish much anyway and Konsi would never do it.

I don’t know what you mean. Winning poker via the use of a hammer is a long honored dwarves tradition.

Ouch.

Ironaically enough, you just take either the horizontal or the vertical distance (whatever is longer) instead of calculating. I hate that rule and never use it, but that’s what RAW says.